I have several text boxes on a SF win Form with similar names txt1 through txt10 and I have an array ar(0) through ar(9) that has integers stored. I would like to set up a loop that would let me store the following:



me.txt1.text = ar(0)

me.txt2.text = ar(1)



and so forth. Is there a way to do this using a loop of some sort? I also know I need to convert the integers to strings I think. TIA.

Assuming the controls are all in the same parent container, it would be pretty easy:







As mentioned, I just typed this, so there might syntax errors or casting issues. The important thing is that controls/components that are containers have a Controls collection that you can use.

Greg's idea is good and may work best depending upon your circumstances. You could also create an internal collection of the items as well:

I got Trent's working but I did not get Greg's to work. When I get to this statement it keeps telling me that a am dealing with a Null but when I put a break point in and check that values they are all there and as they should be so I am not sure what is causing it.



Me.Controls("txt" & idx.ToString()).Text = ar(idx).ToString()



I would like to use your way Greg because it would certainly be shorter but since it is working I am safe for the moment. If either of you have a thought as to what I should check for the error please let me know. Thanks again for the great fast help.

I have found that looping through the controls on SF forms is not as straightforward as on a vanilla winform, the controls are not a member of the Me.controls collection. You may want to stick to Trent's suggestion, otherwise it can be a lot of work to loop through all the container objects on a SF form to get to your bound controls.

Keith Chisarik

You could also use the BoundControls property of the BusinessLayer class if all of the textboxes are bound to the same business object.  However, any time you use a collection of controls that you do not maintain (something besides your code put the objects in the collection), you're not guaranteed that the controls will be in any particular order.  So, it's best to have some code that dumps the controls into your own collection in the order in which you want them, and then loop through that collection.

OK I understand and that is OK since I got it working Trents way and that is cool. But, is there a way to put this in a loop instead of typing them all?

myControls.Add(txt1)
myControls.Add(txt2)
myControls.Add(txt3)

I tried this but it would not work

for cnt = 1 to 40

cntrl = "txt" & cnt.tostring()

myControls.Add(cntrl)

next cnt

Thanks again.

You need to put the actual controls into the list/array, rather than the name of the control. I.e. in you top example, you are putting the actual control into the collection and within the loop you are putting the name into the collection. If you use the method Trent/Ben are suggesting, you will need to put them in individually, then after that you can easily loop through the collection to do whatever you need to them. Best bet would be to have a private method to just load them, then you have one place to update if you change the controls being loaded. If you want to loop, then you need to know what container they are in and you could use the method I suggested, to use a loop to build the names. A third option would be to loop, create the controls (not the name, but the actual control), add them to your collection and add them to the appropriate container on the form.



After reading this, I'd suggest you definitely use your own collection to do manage the controls. As mentioned, you can get into trouble if the controls are in different containers etc. If you use your own collection and then have a method to load that collection, you can then mess with how you are loading it, but the rest of your code is unaffected. Hope that makes sense.

Really, automating the process is better by creating a recursive method like Greg was talking about.  And instead of testing on a name, if you know the control type or if a certain value on that control will be set, you could test on it instead of a name:

Then you could call the method in the form constructor or load like this: